The Obamafication of the world has begun. The Grand Pooh Bah and Paladin of empty platitudes and cotton candy rhetoric has arrived in Afghanistan as he begins a tour of the world he will rule once he dispenses with a pesky old man in the formality of an American election.

It will be at that point that there will be true rejoicing over the fact that America finally has a leader who understands what the world wants from her; to lie down, roll over on her back, and beg to have her stomach scratched.

Obama and the left (as well as a sizable segment of the American people) are desperate to have America “liked again.” The fact that this has never been the case seems to have escaped the lightening like wit of liberals. At the risk of boring you on the subject, the notion that “the world was with us” after 9/11 is so easily debunked that I have devoted several blog posts to this myth. It wasn’t just Arabs who danced in the street when the towers fell. Our allies in Europe and Asia made it clear in the weeks following the attacks that we had it coming to us due to our insufferable arrogance and that it was a good thing America was brought down a peg or two.

The left is fond of talking about the world being a more dangerous place thanks to Bush and that our alliances are in tatters, our allies disgusted, and that we have more enemies now than when Bush took office.

The world is indeed a more dangerous place. But that is because we are finally doing what should have been done 25 years ago; we are confronting the problem of Islamic extremism head on and not trying to wish it away as the previous three presidents were wont to do. There is no doubt in my mind that going after the terrorists, terrorist cells, and governments that support terrorism has made us more unpopular in the Islamic world. Obama believes he can change this dynamic and I wish him well in trying to do so. But the first move he makes of which they don’t much approve, you can bet the same rhetoric being directed against Bush will be dusted off and hurled at a President Obama.

The nations of the world have competing interests as well as common concerns. Some of those interests conflict with our own. The questions about Obama’s foreign policy have always been the about the tightrope that an American president must walk between standing up for our vital interests – alone if necessary – while cooperating with other nations on issues of common concern. I am totally unconvinced that Obama is even aware of the tightrope, that his idea of a successful foreign policy is not having anyone mad at us.

This is not only unrealistic, it is foolhardy. Most nations who wish us ill – even many of our friends – would prefer an America who was the equal of other nations, our superpower status subsumed to serve the will of the do nothing bureaucrats at the United Nations. This is the position of much of the left in this country, in Europe, and most certainly in places like Tehran, Damascus, and the Kremlin. Pinning Gulliver down with a thousand restraining ropes at the hide bound UN would sit quite well in those places where the independent exercise of American power is seen as a threat to their own nefarious designs.

In the end, that is the question about Obama that no one can answer. How vigorously will he defend America’s interests? Will he do so even though it will not be popular in the rest of the world? At bottom, this is the ultimate “global test” – an American president acting in our vital interests and willing to take the disapprobation of the world as a consequence.

Where there is common cause to make with other nations we should make it. Where there are issues that need addressing such as Darfur, the Congo, Zimbabwe, or the Iranian nuclear program we should wherever possible work toward consensus with other nations on what should be done.

But every president since the UN was founded has come up against the intransigence, the blindness, the cynicism, and the double crossing found there and at some point has abandoned multi-lateralism in favor of promoting American interests at the expense of other nation’s desires. In short, does Obama have it in him to buck the rest of the world if he has to? Of this, I am unconvinced.

Will he think more of his personal reputation as a healer, a compromiser, a “good world citizen” – at least how that term is defined by our friends and enemies than the interests of the country? I think there is ample evidence that Obama is at least a borderline narcissist and would have a hard time separating his own image from American interests. Being praised for restraint is fine – as long as it’s justifiable. But what if Obama puts receiving that praise ahead of common sense or America’s interests?

Part of the reason the American people rejected John Kerry was because they weren’t sure he could take decisive action – alone if necessary – to protect America’s security. The same questions should be asked of Obama. Unfortunately, many voters seem enamored of the vision laid out by the left and Obama of a world welcoming America with open arms and praising her forbearance and willingness to act in a cooperative manner with other countries – even at the expense of our own interests.

Does this make us noble? Or stupid? The fact that it could make us dead is all that should concern us.

By: Rick Moran at 8:32 am

16 Responses to “OBAMA’S MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR”

1

retire06 Said:
10:30 am

Well at least the country is moving in the right direction

“In the 29 states (plus the District of Columbia) where voter affiliation is kept by party, the Democrats have scored perceptible gains since the presidential election of 2004 while the Republicans have suffered significant losses. To be specific, the number of registered Democrats in party registration states has grown by nearly 700,000 since President George W. Bush was reelected in November 2004, while the total of registered Republicans has declined by almost 1 million.”

2

Surabaya Stew Said:
1:05 pm

Hey Rick, are you honestly of the belief that Bush’s attitude and actions have not a thing to do with our country’s low moral standing in the world? To hell with that, isn’t our lousy state of mind right now at least somehow attached to his 28% domestic approval rating? After all, you wrote a good article about how a hyper-majority of Americans think we are on the wrong track (84%, if I am not mistaken.) Sure it is more intellectually satisfying to go with experience over likeablty, but we have voted for style over substance in the last 4 elections; what makes you think it will be any different this time? Besides, the person most responsible for the rise of Obama is none other than Bush. If Obama is your worst nightmare, you know who to thank for making it come true.

Honestly, I am still not convinced that Obama will be up to the task of charting a new direction for us in the foreign-policy arena. We do need a President with real ideas about America’s role in the world. It would be wonderful if McCain had any other ideas other than following Bush’s lead in this area. Sadly, he does not offer anything different. After 16 years of inexperienced presidents learning on the job, I would love to have a something different from our Commander-in-chief, but McCain makes it impossible for me to vote for him.

There has not been one single poll or survey about how low our “moral standing” is in the world. You just invented that out of whole cloth. Anti-Americanism is a disease that predates Bush by a couple of decades. American approval numbers have been rising the last year or so by the way. And who except a total dolt takes seriously the surveys that show Europeans believe america is a greater threat to world peace than Russia or Iran? If you believe that you are brain dead and should not be taken seriously. Why the left in this country thinks that is significant is beyond me.

So, most of the world hates us. So what? There has always been a majority of the world that believed the propaganda of their governments and blamed the CIA for everything. Why does it matter when a Republican is president but when Bill Clinton is in there and the numbers are not much better, we are loved and adored? Give me a break.

This is the biggest non issue in electoral history and is only being pushed because it is part of the false, dishonest narrative beeing spouted by the left. We don’t have any more enemies today than we did before Bush became president – in fact we have two fewer; the Taliban and Saddam. Euro attitudes toward America are shaped by a virulently anti-American, far left press across the continent. There is nothing to “restore” or “repair.” It is a made up fantasy of people who find it convenient to make things appear differently than they actually are for political purposes.

ed.

3

retire05 Said:
1:16 pm

Retire06? Oh, how cute. Don’t have enough between your ears to come up with your own moniker?

While the Lightworker should have at least a 10% lead over a Republican candidate who seems to be running the most lack luster campaign in decades, he is just slightly 4% ahead. Add to the fact that at least 35% of the 18,000,000 that voted in the primaries for Hillary say they will not vote for Obama under any circumstances and his constant flip-flopping on major issues to the far left, causing left wing political pundits to have buyer’s remorse, his campaign just might be in some serious trouble.

If Obama takes his “fact finding” trip to really listen to the command on the groud in Afghanistan and Iraq, and really shows that he has the wisdom to listen to those who are doing the heavy lifting, and if he doesn’t make his European jaunt anything other than a major photo op telling the Europeans how he will pander to them as the expense of American interests, he just might break even.

But he is going to have a choice to make; appeal to those “guns and God” blue collar workers in fly over country or lose his far left base. There is a reason that David Axelrod packed little Michelle’s bag and sent her home to Chicago. She can’t keep her mouth shut and she alienates the “guns and God” crowd.

Now, call your mommie and see if she can come up with something original as a moniker for you. Hopefully, she is smarter than you are.

4

Increase Mather Said:
3:27 pm

The election of Barry Obama in November will put George Soros and his ilk in charge of the executive brance.

Barry has not run so much as a paper route in his entire life. He’s an affirmative action baby being promoted to the final pinacle of the Peter Principle pyramid.

I predict disaster upon his election.

And it will be on the heads of the MSM who constantly act as though they will do ANYTHING to have sex with him.

And this is just one of many that I could have chosen to represent my point. To be sure “moral standing” is not a well-defined term, but it is clear that we are not as popular a nation as we used to be just 6 years ago. Fine if you don’t think this is important, but try traveling or selling American goods for a living, and see if defending the USA doesn’t get tiring after a while. It’s all about perception, and while there may not be a big difference between Bill Clinton and George Bush in terms of policy, it doesn’t matter when you talk to the average Joe around the world. Obviously, if experience rather than appearances were all that mattered, John McCain would be a shoo-in for president. (But then again, so would have Al Gore in 2000.) How the world sees us will be better under Obama, and that is a fact, logical or not.

Fewer enemies in the world? Tell that to the Taliban regrouping in Pakistan. I’m sure Evo Morales will be on our side. Daniel Ortega is back in power. No African country wants to host AFRICOM for fear of being unpopular. And the only reason the Middle East hasn’t blown up at us is because of all the petrodollars flowing into their pockets. I wish we had fewer enemies, but it doesn’t seem to be the case.

BTW, you may get more readers if you refrain from insulting the ones you have.

The Taliban have been “regrouping” for 6 years and are not in charge of a country. Any success they are enjoying at the moment is due to the shortsighted and stupid policies of the Paki government. Morales is hardly an “enemy” – Bolivia needs us a hell of a lot more than we need them. Nicaragua is a democracy – nothing Ortega can do to change that.

Even before the dollar was tanking we were setting export records. And the Middle East isn’t exploding because we removed one of the main irritants in the region. If it does explode, it will be because we were stupid and attacked Iran who would then lash out blindly and attempt to start a general war. Are you saying that the Saudis and the Gulf States would go to war against us because of something we did? Why? Against whom? For what? Israel? Don’t be daft. Any scenario you come up with would be so remote as to be dismissed out of hand.

Going back to the time of Nixon, Europeans and most of the world has been anti-American. We are discussing a matter of degree not perception. The perception has always been there.

As for readers, it matters not. If I wanted a lot of readers I’d be a Bushbot and a supporter of the war. But I despise Bush and want to end the war by leaving Iraq as quickly as honor permits. I will insult, hurl obscenities, degrade, denigrate, and otherwise discomfit my readers as I see fit.

The White House employee had intended to send the article to an internal distribution list, ABC News’ Martha Raddatz reports, but hit the wrong button.

The misfire comes at an odd time for Bush foreign policy, at a time when Obama’s campaign alleges the president is moving closer toward Obama’s recommendations about international relations—sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, discussing a “general time horizon” for U.S. troop withdrawal and launching talks with Iran.- Link

I don’t think Obama is going to toady the Europeans. Obama strikes me as just a bit ruthless. It’s one of the reasons I’ve supported him. He’ll do what he has to do to get re-elected and to ensure his place in history. If that means getting along with the Europeans, he’ll do that. If it means smacking the Europeans around, he’ll do that.

This is why you’re all failing to really hurt Obama. He’s not a naif. He’s not corrupt. He’s not a radical. He’s not weak. And accusing him of being a narcissist—really? A presidential candidate who thinks he’s just half a step short of being Jesus? What a shock that would be.

Obama is smart, cool and tough. It’s why your joke contest will fall flat, and why your party’s attacks on him don’t gain traction: he’s none of the things you think he is. He’s not Carter. He’s not Clinton. And he’s not JFK. He’s Bobby Kennedy.

9

retire05 Said:
5:54 pm

Misty, so the White House emailed a Reuters story that originated with the German publication in Der Spiegel and you find that odd? Emailed it to who? You give such little information so one can only assume that you did it intentionally to taint the story. Hell, it’s all over. So what?

I will also tell you that when Reuter’s picked up the Der Spiegel story they reported on the English version which left out a couple of important statements by Maliki.

Obama can say that the Bush administration is moving closer to his own Iraq/Afghanistan policies, but that is spin. Pure and simple. There is a reason we are turning over province after province to the Iraqis (the lastest one just this week). As the Iraqis assume more and more responsibility for the security of their nation, we are needed less in certain areas.

But don’t let the facts of our turning over the provinces to the Iraqis, as planned by this administration and command on the ground, stop your attempt at spin.

10

J. Ewing Said:
6:05 pm

Tell the rest of the world to go pound salt. If they don’t want our dollars for their goods, or our goods and services, they can do without. Sometimes you, and they, cannot get everything you want. You can have the cookie or you can complain that Gramma smells funny, but not both.

Other than that, I don’t know what all the questioning is about. Obama is a modern liberal, irretrievably believing in his own intellectual and moral superiority over everybody. He thinks he can talk absolutely everybody into absolutely anything because he is absolutely right about absolutely everything. The first time he comes up against the real world instead of his delusional alternate universe, though, is the first time the US will find itself with a problem. It will be very early in his Presidency, and there will undoubtedly be more, and often, though the degree of damage can only be imagined.

End the war? Hate Bush? Boy, have I been reading all those anti-Obama posts the wrong way…

Seriously, why aren’t the Taliban all dead by now? And does Ortega really want Nicaragua to continue as a democracy? (Morales needs Venezula more than us, until Chavez falls anyway.) You are quite right about the Saudi and Gulf State leaders not wanting to start a war with us, as it is too profitable to suck our dollars from us. However, this does not mean that the average citizen feels that way; only heavy social spending is keeping their anger in check. (Could this be another factor in these bastards not wanting to pump more oil?) The Arab Street would start a war if given a chance; that is why we support their leaders keeping them in political oppression.

It is possible to argue that Anti-Americanism in Europe has existed going back to the very founding of our nation, yet why is it necessary to defend the good old USA in Asia and Africa? These should be our natural allies! I expect such BS from Canadians wanting to prove their national identity, and from Europeans eager to create one. There are so many missed opportunities here to spread our influence, that it sickens me…

Whatever, say whatever you want, you know that I would love to sit down and have a drink with you some day. I knew it was a matter of time before you came out swinging at me, and I thank you for replying in a challenging, yet thoughtful manner. Its the highlight of reading your blog!

14

jambrowski Said:
12:35 pm

Hey Misty,
Why don’t you say the country is going in the “left” direction and as for your comment on an email being linked (since when did der Speigel become a trustworthy rag), please tell your opinion to Maliki

as for Europe liking us, they started disliking us right after we rebuilt their arses after WWII. Look at the right ward shift in European governments, why? because immigrants and open door policies have destroyed their wonderful little socialist experiment. Just ask any Swede what they think of their open door policy. Oh, retire05 don’t let the punk get under your skin, we all realize his little pedant tactic, rather disingenuous.